Re: [deal.II] installation fails with intel/19.0.5

2019-09-30 Thread Daniel Arndt
Victor, But I’m still not finishing the cmake. > > So there is a ton of > ... > What do those mean? Are they fatal or is that only cmake discovering > what’s available and what not? > No, these are not fatal. We just check for the dependencies to enable. Again, what is the full output when runni

[deal.II] Using interpolate_boundary_conditions

2019-09-30 Thread Amy Kaczmarowski
Hi, I'm attempting to apply a displacement boundary condition on a surface in my problem. However, I would like the direction of the displacement of each point on the surface to depend on its direction from some point (for example the origin). Imagine a balloon inflating where the displacemen

Re: [deal.II] installation fails with intel/19.0.5

2019-09-30 Thread Victor Eijkhout
On Sep 30, 2019, at 5:29 PM, Marc Fehling mailto:m.fehl...@fz-juelich.de>> wrote: DDEAL_II_HAVE_FLAG_Wimplicit_fallthrough=0 Hm. Turns out I had an explicit c++14 in my compiler specification. At least now I don’t get that fallthrough message anymore. But I’m still not finishing the cmake.

[deal.II] Re: About Darcy-Brinkman-Forchheimer equation discretization

2019-09-30 Thread Bruno Blais
Hello, It depends of the value of the Reynolds number and the gradients of K with respect to x or t, but generally the last two terms do not generally pose problems. The first additional term to the right leads to a mass matrix, which is well conditioned. The second term itself is trickier. If

Re: [deal.II] installation fails with intel/19.0.5

2019-09-30 Thread Marc Fehling
On Monday, September 30, 2019 at 11:01:45 PM UTC+2, Victor Eijkhout wrote: > > > > On Sep 30, 2019, at 3:23 PM, Marc Fehling > wrote: > > Victor, have you tried disabling C++17 support? Maybe that'll do the > trick... > > > cmake option please? > > (is there a list of all cmake options for your

Re: [deal.II] installation fails with intel/19.0.5

2019-09-30 Thread Marc Fehling
On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 11:24:12 PM UTC+2, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: > > Didn't we recently merge a patch where ICC reported that it understands > C++17, but doesn't in fact support this attribute? Does that ring a bell > for anyone? > Intel published a list of all C++17 features tha

[deal.II] Re: Issue with boost serialization and spack?

2019-09-30 Thread Konrad Simon
Thank you, Denis. I use a pretty stupid (but simple) workaround: I setup and compile deal.ii myself since all dependencies are compiled and use the cmake command used by spack. That works. And I do not get the serialization error. However, now my code runs on the machine I installed it on. But